The Calcutta High Court has overturned the death sentence of Sujit Dey Bhowmik, originally imposed by a trial court for the murder of his wife. The High Court’s decision emphasized that the lower court had incorrectly characterized Bhowmik as a ‘demon’ who failed to adhere to his marital vows, thus justifying a death sentence. The case, State of West Bengal v. Sujit Dey Bhowmik, was presided over by Justices Shampa Sarkar and Smita Das De.
While the High Court upheld Bhowmik’s conviction for murder and for injuring two of his wife’s family members, it reduced his sentence to life imprisonment. The court highlighted the trial court’s failure to consider mitigating factors and the potential for rehabilitation.
Trial Court’s Missteps
The trial court had heavily focused on the Vedic marriage mantras exchanged by Bhowmik and his wife, concluding that his actions were a violation of those vows. This led the trial judge to categorize the crime as a ‘rarest of rare’ case, thus deserving of the death penalty. The judge described Bhowmik as a ‘demon’ whose mindset could not be altered even with corrective measures.
The incident occurred in June 2023 in Jalpaiguri, where Bhowmik attacked his wife with an axe during a quarrel at her parents’ home. The assault was witnessed by their 7-year-old son. When her mother and grandmother intervened, they too were injured in the attack. The wife’s mother sustained a severe chest injury, while her grandmother suffered multiple injuries, including the loss of vision in one eye.
High Court’s Findings
The High Court criticized the trial court’s reasoning, noting that it had not requested a report on Bhowmik’s conduct while in custody, nor had it ordered a psychiatric evaluation. A probation officer’s report, obtained at the High Court’s request, revealed no prior criminal record for Bhowmik. It also indicated good behavior in custody and ongoing counseling sessions.
Furthermore, the High Court noted that the murder might not have been premeditated. Bhowmik and his wife had shared a meal with her family shortly before the altercation, suggesting that the violence arose spontaneously from their argument.
The justices referenced Supreme Court precedents, which require trial courts to evaluate an accused’s mental state and potential for reform before imposing the death penalty. The High Court found that the trial court’s decision lacked such an evaluation, basing its judgment solely on the violation of Hindu marriage rituals.
In light of these findings, the High Court commuted Bhowmik’s death sentence to life imprisonment with rigorous conditions. The defense team comprised Advocates Aniruddha Biswas, Subham Chanda, Monoj Saha, and Kanak Mishra, while Advocates Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Abhijit Sarkar, and Arjun Chowdhury represented the State.
